"That's not enough to refute derekp's point, though."
Fine, fine, it doesn't "refute" it, it "merely" makes it irrelevant to the real world.
I don't think the rest of your message is particularly relevant to mine. Having claimed that there are varying degrees of safety, I'm not sure how an extended discussion of the varying degrees of safety of various technologies counters anything I said.
(Also, as a pragmatic matter, I consider "C" and "C + Valgrind + Coverity + whatever else" to basically be different languages. However, don't talk to me about how wonderful the latter is if you're programming in the former! You have to actually use the tools, not just get a sense of comfort from the fact they exist.)
Fine, fine, it doesn't "refute" it, it "merely" makes it irrelevant to the real world.
I don't think the rest of your message is particularly relevant to mine. Having claimed that there are varying degrees of safety, I'm not sure how an extended discussion of the varying degrees of safety of various technologies counters anything I said.
(Also, as a pragmatic matter, I consider "C" and "C + Valgrind + Coverity + whatever else" to basically be different languages. However, don't talk to me about how wonderful the latter is if you're programming in the former! You have to actually use the tools, not just get a sense of comfort from the fact they exist.)